Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[Figaro]

most of things I cant say with my upmost confidence, but WS-15 is one thing that I can assure you that it has not finished crutial tests yet````still years needed for them to put it on serving J-20s``````and I also mentioned the shape of the "菊花” ```it could be flat or it could be round```time will tell

Big Shrimp claims that it has serrated nozzles similar to the F-35. I’m eyeing for a 2019 incorporation on the J-20 if it goes well and maturity by 2023/24

 

[j20blackdragon]

The second length estimate posted by Deino has the J-20 at 21.3m.

That correlates well with this second diagram I have. F-22 is listed at 18.92m. That's close enough.

Now back to my original point. If you measured the F-22 from nose to nozzles, it's actually quite short.

And yet, that short little plane is powered by two F119 engines. Could the F-22 still fly with AL-31? Maybe. But it wouldn't do its job very well. That's all I'm saying.

 

[rcrmj]

Big Shrimp claims that it has serrated nozzles similar to the F-35. I’m eyeing for a 2019 incorporation on the J-20 if it goes well and maturity by 2023/24

which shrimp? I need verify it```

 

[Figaro]

which shrimp? I need verify it```

I forgot which one. But it would seem very logical to have serrated nozzles to prevent rear RCS.

 

[Deino]

"J-20 is smaller and "shorter" than the flankers`"

Not, if you don't include, the 2 meters long tail boom, that sticks out past the nozzle. Nose to nozzle wise, J-20 is longer than the flankers. Those two meters long tail boom, don't add a lot of extra weight, and can't contain a lot of internal fuel.

That might be and no-one denies this but my point is: if the length of a Flanker including tail is shorter than 22 m how could then in Your end-calculation the J-20 be longer than 22m when it is clearly not longer than a Flanker?

I'm always speaking of overall-length !

Again, I don't say my estimation is exact; I clearly stated it has a margin of +/- 20 or 30 cm, but in the end regardless all blur a direct comparison side-by-side is always the more reliable one than taking two different images and scaling them up and down and again.

I don't understand why some don't accept this. Or do I need to repost my apple-vs-banana file?

Deino

 

[Figaro]

That might be and no-one denies this but my point is: if the length of a Flanker including tail is shorter than 20 m how could then in Your end-calculation the J-20 be longer than 22m when it is clearly not longer than a Flanker?

I'm always speaking of overall-length !

Again, I don't say my estimation is exact; I clearly stated it has a margin of +/- 20 or 30 cm, but in the end regardless all blur a direct comparison side-by-side is always the more reliable one than taking two different images and scaling them up and down and again.

I don't understand why some don't accept this. Or do I need to repost my apple-vs-banana file?

Deino

I got 19.8 to 20.4 range ...

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

I think 20 tonnes for the empty weight of the J-20 makes sense, since it got more reinforced structure than China's other aircrafts.

Thus, it should also be heavier.

 

[Asoka]

This is my best effort yet, guys.

1.) I took the overall length (18.80m) and wingspan (13.56m) data of F-22 from Lockeed Martin's website, and use the wingspan data (13.47m) of J-20, posted Deino earlier.

2.) I took, two high resolution, and most flat pictures of J-20 and F-22, I can find, and overlaid F-22 ontop of J-20, while keeping the proportion, the same.

3.) I resize the F-22 picture, until, it's wingspan is about the same as J-20, then I align them at the nozzles. (You can also align them at the noses.)

4.) Then, I took a metric ruler image from the web, and overlaid it ontop of F-22, and resize it and align it, so the mark 18.8 is exactly the same as F-22's overall length.

5.) I copied the same ruler, and place it at various measurement points, and obtained the following values, by using F-22's overall length of 18.8m as reference.

(1.) F-22 overall length: 18.80m
(2.) F-22 nose-nozzle length: 16.7m
(3.) J-20 overall length: 21.64m
(4.) J-20 nose-nozzle length: 21.14m
(5.) F-22 Wingspan: 13.56m (given by Lockeed Martin)
J-22 wingspan: 13.47m (posted by Deino)
(6.) Nose to Nozzle Fuselage Length difference b/n J-20 and F-22: 4.4m
(7.) I obtained the overall length difference b/n J-20 and F-22, by subtracting 21.64m - 18.8m = 2.84m

Those values are very close, to what I have posted before. I challenge anybody, who disagree with my findings, to do his own researches, not just quoting values, from some very blurry satellite pictures.

So my final conclusions are:

1.) J-20's overall length is 21.6m, not 20.35m, as from the blurry satellite picture.


This is 2.84m longer than F-22, which is not far from the 9.5ft (2.97m) difference, published by Bill Sweetman in "Aviation Week" magazine.

2.) And J-20 is 4.4m longer than F-22, when measured from Nose to Nozzle.

 

[Figaro]

View attachment 426723

This is my best effort yet, guys.

1.) I took the overall length (18.80m) and wingspan (13.56m) data of F-22 from Lockeed Martin's website, and use the wingspan data (13.47m) of J-20, posted Deino earlier.

2.) I two high resolution, and most flat pictures of J-20 and F-22, I can find, and overlaid F-22 ontop of J-20, while keeping the proportion, the same.

3.) I resize the F-22 picture, until, it's wingspan is about the same as J-20, then I align them at the nozzles. (You can also align them at the noses)

4.) Then, I took a ruler image from the web, and overlaid it ontop of F-22, and resize it and align it, so the mark 18.8 is exactly the same as F-22's overall length.

5.) I copied the same ruler, and place it at various measurement points, and obtained the following values, by using F-22's overall length of 18.8m as reference.

(1.) F-22 overall length: 18.80m
(2.) F-22 nose-nozzle length: 16.7m
(3.) J-20 overall length: 21.64m
(4.) J-20 nose-nozzle length: 21.14m
(5.) F-22 Wingspan: 13.56m (given by Lockeed Martin)
J-22 wingspan: 13.47m (posted by Deino)
(6.) Nose to Nozzle Fuselage Length difference b/n J-20 and F-22: 4.4m
(7.) I obtained the overall length difference b/n J-20 and F-22, by subtracting 21.64m - 18.8m = 2.84m

Those values are very close to what I have posted before. I challenge anybody, who disagree with my findings to do his own researches, not just quoting values, from some very blurry satellite pictures.

So my final conclusion is J-20's overall length is 21.6m (which is 2.84m longer than F-22), not 20.35m, and J-20 is 4.4m longer than F-22, when measured from Nose to Nozzle.

. And I'm telling you you're wrong ... your measurement is just as ridiculous as the WS-15 theory ...

 

[Deino]

. And I'm telling you you're wrong ... your measurement is just as ridiculous as the WS-15 theory ...

I think we should take a rest ... like he just said:

This is my best effort yet, guys.
...

But sometimes even a best try can be far from good.

Deino

 

[Asoka]

I think 20 tonnes for the empty weight of the J-20 makes sense, since it got more reinforced structure than China's other aircrafts.

Thus, it should also be heavier.

Note: Lockeed Martin listed F-22's empty weight as 19.7 tons.

"I think 20 tonnes for the empty weight of the J-20 makes sense"

If that's true, I bet the engineers from Lockeed Martin will bow down, to those guys at Chengdu, and worship them as Aeronautical Engineering gods.

The engineers at Lockheed Martin, didn't want to build an airplane as heavy as they could build. They tried as hard as they could to bring down the weight of F-22 and F-35, through a fanatic weight saving efforts. (Lots of ridiculously, very expensive Titanium and Carbon fiber composites components and parts)

At 21.2m, the fuselage length of J-20 is 26.35% longer than F-22's 16.7m. It will be very lucky for J-20's weight not 26.35% (5.2 tons) heavier's than F-22's 19.7 tons, while all the performance parameters and airframe structural strength and service life, matches F-22.

I have used the estimated empty weight of 22 tons for J-20, out of the desire to be conservative in my estimate. If that turns out to be true, that would be mean J-20 is only 10% heavier than F-22, despite its fuselage length is 26.35% longer.

This is a very incredible aeronautical achievement.

If the engineers from Chengdu, could build a 5-Gen plane that is the same class as F-22, with the similar airframe strength and maneuverability ability (9g at subsonic speed, 6.5g at Mach 1.5, and lasts over 8, 000 hrs or 30 years), but it's fuselage is 4.4m longer, nose to nozzle, and still, it WEIGHTS THE SAME, then they are gods, when compared to other guys from Lockeed Martin.

But Lockeed Martin is no losers and copycats, it is the company, which built all those airplanes, since WWII:

C-130 Hercules,
F-104 Starfighter,
P-3 Orion,
U-2 spyplane,
C-5 Galaxy large transporter,
YF-12 Blackbird, supersonic interceptor
SR-71 Blackbird
F-16 Fighting Falcon
F-117 Nighthawk
F-22 Raptor
F-35 Lightning II

You can say Lockeed Martin is an Aviation Company that is second to none, when it comes to building high performance military airplanes.

And how many airplanes China has built that is not a copy of the Russian's Migs and Sukois, and planes from other countries?

@Deino, "But sometimes even a best try can be far from good. "

But, a best try is far better than not trying at all.

 

[Ultima Thule]

. And I'm telling you you're wrong ... your measurement is just as ridiculous as the WS-15 theory ...

He will not understand you Mr @Figaro every respected site like jane's, flight global, aviation weekly stated that J-20 under 21m length, @Asoka who is true you or those respected sites they have lot of photographic experts

 

[Figaro]

He will not understand you Mr @Figaro every respected site like jane's, flight global, aviation weekly stated that J-20 under 21m length, @Asoka who is true you or those respected sites they have lot of photographic experts

I'm done countering his ridiculous claims ... he dismisses all "Big Shrimps" and PLAAF watchers as charlatans and calls himself an authority ...

 

[Ultima Thule]

I'm done countering his ridiculous claims ... he dismisses all "Big Shrimps" and PLAAF watchers as charlatans and calls himself an authority ...

No @Asoka is currently working on J-20/WS-15 projects he knows better than PLAAF and chinese goverments, right @Asoka

 

[samsara]

@Asoka is trying very hard possibly too hard trying to convince some others that the J-20 indeed has higher value than what it's perceived at present; while some other members do not agree at all and steadily keep holding on the J-20's current nominal value as they perceive... and the exchanges look like the exchange of the FAITH / RELIGION matters that won't come into agreement even it sheds the blood....

Only time will be the true testimony which side is right and wrong (overrate; underrate; standard rate --- no one is sure 100%)...and IF ONLY new info is released as time goes by... and as far as concerning the Chinese interests this matter is not relevant at all!! They won't release and disclose all information to tell the world what's the true state of their jet fighter...China does not need such recognition for the crucial assets... the world may just believe whatever they may want to believe regarding these major military stuffs incl. the J-20 and many other prime assets... every one here can only guess guess then guess... thus to be deadly sure of anything about this J-20 let alone ridicule others is rather silly, IMO. Best perhaps to rest the case and switch the focus to other visible aspects

For me and many others perhaps the silent majority here, we are more interested to see the obvious ones and some other developments that can not be hidden... which are open to the many eyes to see.